A French company I know about has different spaces for different functions.

People doing clerical repetitive work sit in an open office area, but in small clusters of 2-3 seats so you don't feel like participating in a dystopian future.

People that require to concentrate for long stretches of time have offices, shared between 2 people at most. In the middle of that area there are standing up long desks were these people can congregate with colleagues to discuss technical matters.

There are lots of offices since most people are not doing repetitive work.

They also have several meeting rooms of different sizes, tables of differing sizes where quick improvised meetings can be held, and the canteen is communal, airy with striking views of town centre.

This is not a tech firm, it is an old school utilities company (oil, gas, that kind of stuff).

A company that is not going to great lengths to understand the kind of working space its workforce needs is not helping itself.

In p 31 he is asked to hand over the SSL and TLS keys for his service, which in practical terms it would allow the FBI to eavesdrop in the communications of *everybody* at will, this with all certainty would have meant a breach of contract with his users, lawsuits would have ensued. Would the FBI have paid for the damages?

Most importantly Lavabit was willing to comply with the original request, which was limited to a single email account.

You'll have to try harder if you want to dispel the positive aura around Ladar..

Many outlets in the right wing media will have a field day with the name alone.

If one is going to try to occupy the moral high ground the choice of language really matters: you are framing the debate by how you word every single relevant item related to a given project, and which item will have greater visibility than the very name of your project?

By using such a name they are serving in a silver plate the opportunity to malicious, uninformed and naive commentators to badmouth whatever they come up with and that before having put forward a single detailed sentence about the proposal.

DarkMail may sound cool, but from the start is eliciting all the wrong kind of associations, I am sure many parties in the field could be interested to join such an effort, but the DarkMail name alone may put some people off.

The name really should be changed, these battles are difficult as it is, people shouldn't make it unnecessarily harder than it is going to be.

Let me put an example, lets compare these 2 headlines:

"Terrorists confess to using DarkMail"and"Terrorists confess to using PrivateMail"

Look, at the end I know it is the same thing, but while a headline would push many to say "yeah, tell me something new" the other may elicit comments of the kind of "What? That is what I use to email my bank"

Ease of use.Consistent protocol for exchange of encrypted mail (which could be based on PGP).Key decentralization and anonymitation....

Using PGP is a PITA in most stand alone systems (Windows, OSX, Linux) relies in way too much trust as well (how do you know that PGP key is legit?), and it isn't implemented at all in big emailers (Gmail, Yahoo Mail, Microsoft's whatever it is called this week, etc).

... if you had an education you would know that an anecdote is not enough substantiation for statistical analysis.

After interviewing and working with hundreds of IT people I can assure you that your situation is the exception, not the norm.

People that learned to put a bit of code together, disassembled a PC to change a RAM chip or do some other menial IT work are promoted to positions for which they are sorely lacking in skills.

They don't care to document what they do (because they never undertook six months or a year of software engineering classes), they don't have the mathematics and physics background to tackle complex problems (because they missed calculus, classical physics and other knowledge imparted at degree level foundation courses) , they try to reinvent the wheel (because they didn't take courses about computational algorithms) and they keep programming undocumented spaghetti code (normally Perl) because they didn't receive formal education as programmers (structured and object oriented programming), or they don't know how to avoid the basic pitfalls when designing a database (because they didn't learn the mathematical theory behind database design).

You tell people that they will be ok without a solid education, those of us that know this to be untrue will have less competition. Many thanks.